Just realized Wheating's 3:30 was at Monaco... no wonder it was a fluke.

Why is it that in the top 10 "all-time" 1500m, only 2 were run in Monaco and 3 were run in Zurich?

Btggvhgvjgjvvjh wrote:

Why is it that in the top 10 "all-time" 1500m, only 2 were run in Monaco and 3 were run in Zurich?

Because the current Monaco surface wasn't installed until 2010.

El Guerrouj missed his shot at 3:23.xx.

Monaco ain't legit wrote:

...

Because the current Monaco surface wasn't installed until 2010.

El Guerrouj missed his shot at 3:23.xx.

Ok, I'll play that game.

Then how come 10 of the 10 best 1500m times run since 2010 were run in Monaco?

Oh wait...

Monaco ain't legit wrote:

He hasn't been struggling all these years, he just popped one at an illegitimate track - the first year the new surface was added.

Monaco ain't legit people.

So adjust for the track and call it a 3:33.4 - still damn fast, just not quite as fast.

How far off from the WR is the stadium record for the 2000m steeplechase?

Wheating's 3:30 was at Monaco.

Manzano's 3:30 was at Monaco.

Centro's 3:30 was at Monaco.

The last American to run 3:30 outside of Monaco was Alan Webb, in Paris.

Wheating has not run under 3:34 outside of Monaco.

Manzano's second best time is 3:32 low.

Centro has run 3:31.96 outside of Monaco but 4 of the last 5 years his season best has been run at Monaco.

Since 2008 the world leading 1500m times have been run at:

2008 Monaco

2009 Berlin

2010 Monaco

2011 Rieti (.01 s faster than the winning time at Monaco that year)

2012 Monaco

2013 Monaco

2014 Monaco

2015 Monaco

Of the 10 fastest 1500m runners of all time, 6 of them set their PR in Monaco.

The other 4- 1 in Rome, 1 in Brussels, 1 in Nice and 1 in Zurich.

Monaco ain't legit wrote:

He hasn't been struggling all these years, he just popped one at an illegitimate track - the first year the new surface was added.

Monaco ain't legit people.

Wheating runs his best time at the most important 1500m of the year, against the best competition, and when he was in the best fitness of his life?

Imagine that?

4 years of continuous partying will destroy the most talented of runners.

please explain why the monaco track record for 400 post '10 is a totally crap 44.3 by lashawn last year when his sb was 43.9 in lausanne ???

that woud make lausanne an immensely faster track than monaco

was his PB/PR set before/after his was caught doping? If it was, your argument is flawed, otherwise it is a valid point.

ventolin^3 wrote:

please explain why the monaco track record for 400 post '10 is a totally crap 44.3 by lashawn last year when his sb was 43.9 in lausanne ???

that woud make lausanne an immensely faster track than monaco

This might be a dumb suggestion by me, but is it possible that the surface gives the most return for 1500-meter efforts?

Or let's suppose the track is short, say 398 meters. Wouldn't that make a trivial dent in 400 times compared to 1500-meter times?

Monaco has the best 1500m rabbit in history: he goes the full distance every time:

2015 3:26.69 Monaco (Stade Louis II) 17 JUL

2014 3:28.45 Monaco (Stade Louis II) 18 JUL

2013 3:27.72 Monaco (Stade Louis II) 19 JUL

2012 3:28.88 Monaco (Stade Louis II) 20 JUL

No mystery/conspiracy to this one.

If Wheating didn't get injured, what would he be running now? 3:28?

The track in Atlantha was good for sprinting not for LD. Geb complained

that the 10000m f*** his calves up

yyy wrote:was his PB/PR set before/after his was caught doping? If it was, your argument is flawed, otherwise it is a valid point

eh ???

what part of 43.9 in lausanne in same season did you miss ???

jamin wrote:

but is it possible that the surface gives the most return for 1500-meter efforts?

1500 is a unique combination of a bounding stride at around same 180 cadence as long distance. Runners with long bouncy strides get a huge boost from a bouncy track. Like Kiprop. Dibaba.

400 and under is much higher cadence - it's more about grabbing the ground with your spikes and throwing it backwards than jumping into the air. Gravity can't be adjusted, so if you bounce higher you stay in the air longer and your cadence suffers. Sprints do better on a hard non-bouncy track like Historic Hayward Field.

jamin wrote:This might be a dumb suggestion by me, but is it possible that the surface gives the most return for 1500-meter efforts?

1) how is that possible to do ???

2) if possible, why bother when every meet promoter wants fast sprint times ???

Or let's suppose the track is short, say 398 meters. Wouldn't that make a trivial dent in 400 times compared to 1500-meter times?

then explain how gatlin ran 19.68 into a wind there ??

how can it be correct distance for 200 but not 400 ???

as for your suggestion of 398m, that -> for lashawn 44.30 for 398m -> for 400 :

~ 44.30 * ( 400/ 398 ) = 44.52 !!!

he ran 43.98 in lausanne same season

Bad Wigins wrote:400 and under is much higher cadence - it's more about grabbing the ground with your spikes and throwing it backwards than jumping into the air. Gravity can't be adjusted, so if you bounce higher you stay in the air longer and your cadence suffers. Sprints do better on a hard non-bouncy track like Historic Hayward Field

nonsense

how do you therfore explain gatlin's 19.68 there last year when he ran into a -0.5 with a crap bend where he struggled so bad he was near outer lane line running ~ 2.5m extra on bend from ideal line 20cm from inner lane line ???

if he'd run on 0 wind day, tight line 20cm from inner lane line on bend he wouda run

~ 19.3 -mid !!!

how can this be a great track for 200 & 1500 but crap for 400 ???

ventolin^3 wrote:

then explain how gatlin ran 19.68 into a wind there ??

what rock have you been hiding under? Everyone knows how Gatlin did that.